![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
If does by more than 15% in some scenario according to intel and all the notion of pushing things on E-core is based on that premise.
Just think about the same scenario for which a thread botter an important thread on a P-core you described, why would it not with Hyper Thread ? It is now more likely to happen than with hyperthread no ?
Apple did kill off MacOS x86.
Yes.
Didn't say the Steam Deck would outsell it, but that if you're in the market for a portable gaming device then even the Switch 2 might be overlooked for a Steam Deck Clone like the Asus Rog Ally.
Which is why I said Nintendo made sure to shut down Yuzu. If you could play Switch 2 games on the Asus Rog Ally... then what?
Yea, and I'm one of them.
Compared to the list of games you could play on PC? Nintendo games are included if you go the emulation route.
Doubt it when they just released Tear of the Kingdom, which by the way was a problem for Nintendo since PC gamers got to play it first.
I don't see those numbers based on your link, but they instead show that AMD has 33% of the x86 market while Intel has 64%. iPads aren't laptops, as much as Apple likes putting Apple M chips in them. Might as well include the cell phone market and just dwarf AMD and Intel in sales.
I didn't say that. I said their GPU's aren't bad. If GPU performance is a problem for ARM then that won't change anytime soon.
They technically always have been. When Apple went Intel it wasn't because x86 was so good, but because Intel's manufacturing was so good. You couldn't get Intel's manufacturing without buying an Intel x86 chip. Sandy Bridge was what cemented Intel for nearly a decade until Meteor Lake was created. All the evidence suggests that any attempt to have the PC desktop go ARM has failed. Microsoft tried to go ARM long before Apple thought it was cool. Apple's Macbook sales are dwindling because Macbook users are asking themselves if avoiding x86 is worth going into MacOS ARM. Especially with Meteor Lake that gives good enough battery life. Why isn't Apple's M4 on Macbooks first? Why is Apple selling M2 iPad Air's as new in 2024? Why did the $3,500 Vision Pro have an M2 in it and not an M3? You think Apple is giving buyers a discounted iPad because the CPU is from 2022? The sales of the Macs are so poor that Apple is still selling a 2022 M2 in 2024. Nobody is questioning this? Especially when we know they have a 34% decline year over year? And you think Intel is going to hand in the x86 towel because ARM is going to take over the laptop market? Intel has real problems to worry about.
battery is almost 50% bigger than the M3 and yet it is almost equal it seem in that example of the time stamp, maybe I do not understand the number but does it not show a much larger whours drains on the Ryzen ?
The difference of the two batteries is 31% and not nearly 50%. Also, the M3 Macbook Air has no fan which means when it does get hot it will thermal throttle and use less battery. A 14 inch Macbook would have a bigger battery, but so is the screen and now includes a fan. The bigger battery isn't helping much for the Macbook 14 with M3. Comparing laptops is funny business because no two are exactly the same. Screens matter, the amount of ram matters, and etc. Whatever the case is, the Asus Zenbook 14 running on AMD's 8840HS did last longer in video playback. To what degree would a buyer care if Asus is cheating with a bigger battery? If Apple could they would put in a bigger battery. Keep in mind that AMD's 8840HS is still 4nm, and not the 3nm that Apple is using.
I thought I saw 50 instead of 52.5 at first and did not change, but still 75 is 43% bigger.
It either achieves to play the netflix movie correctly without stutter at full resolution or not, in this example, we can give some benefit of the doubt that the tester would point it out if it failed.
Well the big battery (72.4w) beat everyone with 83% of the battery left wiolt the smaller battery was at 73% despite having a smaller screen so we would imagine burning less watt.
They get warm, not hot, it can happily sit on your lap and not be uncomfortable heated seats on low are hotter.
Probably neither laptop was getting hot enough to turn a fan on for video playback. The point is that comparing laptops is not 1:1.
It was mostly compared to other Macbooks. There was two Ultra 7 155H laptops. The main thing here is to look at the other Macbooks with the 4 hour Netflix playback compared to the 13inch M3. The M3 Pro Macbook 14" had 83% battery left, compared to the M3 Macbook Air's 73%. The 15" Macbook Air M3 got 78%. The AMD Zenbook 14" at 74% isn't bad at all. One could say that AMD's x86 8840HS is inline with Apple's M3's efficiency.
Just for clarification, the Macbook Pro 14" has the same thickness as the Zenbook 14". Macbooks 22.12 cm vs Zenbooks 22.01cm. Asus was able to pack in more battery and a removable SSD.
The Macbook Air M3 was probably chosen for price, as he review laptops. The Zenbook 14" with the AMD 8840HS is $800. The base model M3 Macbook Pro 14" is $1600. The base model M3 Macbook Air 13" is $1,100. The Zenbook 14" has twice the ram and storage too, so it can't be a better comparison.
Yes exactly the bigger battery M3 had 83% left, the smaller battery M3 laptop had 73% left, which make lot of sense, why say the bigger battery did not help ?
Why, how ? and who would use % of battery instead of whours used ? The similar (just a bit smaller for Apple) battery laptop had 83% left versus 74% for the 8840HS, that a massive difference, 17% of a smaller battery vs 26% of a bit bigger battery (and with a 1920x1200 monitor, will assume precaution were made to not play higher res content on one ot ther other)
Exactly making even stranger to use the smaller battery-thinner air for a battery comp instead of the pro with almost the exact same battery and thickness here (if we speak technology, maybe if one use price point to create their comp for a customer that make sense).
That a complete different conversation that what Arm chips vs x86 under 15 watt, ability to idle, ability to go under 15 watt to do task and so on are
Yes but at what point is that due to the SoC? Remember, no two laptops are alike. We're trying to compare an entire laptop in hopes to determine which is more power efficient. For example the Asus has a removable SSD. Does that consume more power? A bit probably. The screen on the Asus has a response time of 0.2ms while the Macbook Pro M3 has a response time of ... 43.6 ms. That's not even it's worse response time, as it's been tested to be even as bad as 66.9 ms. All these things factor power consumption. If you want to isolate the SoC's then you'd want to test a Mac Mini vs the hundreds of Mini PC's with an AMD chip in it.
Probably because these laptops can last all day on battery.
Yes but you're also comparing a $1,600 laptop to a $800 laptop. Not only that but the $800 laptop has twice the ram and twice the storage of the $1,600 Macbook Pro.
0.2ms vs 43.6 ms which I will assume that lower response times use more power. Probably more so than high pixels.
That's very much the elephant in the room. Keep in mind that AMD's 8840HS is just a 7840HS with maybe AI junk thrown in it. So it's kinda an old chip, with a new name. Whatever the case is, the x86 AMD laptop will last as long as a M3 Macbook Air 13" on battery, while performing like a M3 Pro Macbook Pro. Again, cheaper than both, with twice the ram and storage with removable storage. Another thing is that the 8840HS isn't even AMD's current laptop chip. That would be the AMD Ryzen Ai 300 series as reviewers have them in their hands and are ready to release reviews on them. RDNA 3.5 + Zen 5 is going to be even better. You can even buy one today for $1,400. Three times the ram of and twice the storage of an M3 Pro Macbook Pro. Gotta wait for reviews to see how the battery life is like. I imagine it's even better.
If I can't run all of my x86 programs with no noticeable performance impact then I have no interest in running an arm CPU.